step in the right direction!.....what do you think?

[BLOCK]

my previous post about teachers "explain to me why!!" still stands but heres some good news for our kindergarden-grade8 students!

TORONTO (Reuters) - Ontario kindergarten students may read next year about the reality of having two dads.
The union representing elementary teachers in Ontario's public school system voted overwhelmingly on Wednesday in favor of a motion to lobby school boards to buy storybooks that include gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender characters, for pupils from kindergarten to Grade 8.

Phyllis Benedict, president of the Elementary Teachers' Federation of Ontario, said she will push the Ontario government and regional school boards to fund gay material, noting that some teachers already use gay storybooks.

"I used a picture book called "My Two Dads". It was about a child and a family that had two fathers. It was beautifully illustrated and done, and it dealt with the issue with sensitivity," Benedict said.

The motion to promote the new schoolbooks was put forward by the union's lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender members committee. Leona Laird, head of the committee, said the books would help children who may be stigmatized because they come from families with gay or lesbian parents.

"We're not asking for a whole curriculum program," Laird said. "We're asking for some books, when there's some children who don't feel welcome in their classroom, that they can go and say 'Hey, I'm not different'."

The motion does not mean gay books will automatically fill bookshelves in Ontario's classrooms in September since it's up to individual school boards to decide which materials to fund.

The union's motion comes in marked contrast to a recent decision by a school board in the west coast province of British Columbia, which banned three books used to introduce children to families involving same-sex couples. The board argued the books were not appropriate for kindergarten.

http://home-news.excite.ca/news/r/010815/19/news-life-canada-gays-col


do you think it's a good thing that they voted for funding for those books, i can tell you i think its great.

it's not the first Canadian step in the right direction, we have such things like "Queer Tv" and now gay/lesbian books in schools..

 

[Henry Rollins]

That is ridiculous having kindergarten kids learn about those things, it is ridiculous talking to them about sex in general. Let them have some kind of childhood first before bringing up such subjects like that. Those school systems should find a different grade, a much higher up grade before talking about such things.

~rougerum

 

[80sU2isBest]

Originally posted by Henry Rollins:
That is ridiculous having kindergarten kids learn about those things, it is ridiculous talking to them about sex in general. Let them have some kind of childhood first before bringing up such subjects like that. Those school systems should find a different grade, a much higher up grade before talking about such things.
~rougerum

I agree, rougerum!

 

[BLOCK]

well thats obviouse, but what these teachers are talking about are the kindergardeners who have two same sex parents, this is just an atempt to make those children not feel like they are different from the rest. To "fit in" with the rest of their chums.

 

[Henry Rollins]

I think the parents need to discuss that with the children in private and it could be dicussed in private after class or something with the teacher but doing the above will still put those ideas in the heads of all the rest of the kids in the class and so it should be kept private and the child so be told to ignore this fact of his life and concentrate on having fun. I think it is a private matter only for kids at that age.

~rougerum

 

[bonoman]

I totally agree with rougerm. This are kids aged 5-11. They cant fully comprehend gay and lesbian relationships. If a child was seen reading a book about gay parents then that would make him a target. Plain and simple. That kid would be picked on to death, he then would resent him parent. This is very much a private and a family issue. To bring this into the classroom is a problem waiting to happen. Teachers always try to stop kids from being made fun of but it always happens and these kids would be walking around with a bullseye on their back for bully's!

------------------
Running to Stand Still-"you gotta cry without weeping, talk without speaking, scream without raising your voice."

"we're not burning out we're burning up...we're the loudest folk band in the world!"-Bono

 

[Halpick N]

I don't understand this. In the village from which I reside, no one has two papas. It is Halpick and Henneh, not Halpick and Jilo. Jilo has been my good friend for many years. He would not stand being married to me. There is something not natural about that. As my mother used to say "when the day is at midpoint, you know it is time to watch the skies for a sign of the birds returning from their moorings".
Milk of kindness to all,
Halpick Neftin

 

[U2Bama]

Halpick Neftin, good to see you again! Where have you been lately? Did you and Jilo get everything worked out with the magistrates?

~U2Alabama

 

[Halpick N]

Originally posted by U2Bama:
Halpick Neftin, good to see you again! Where have you been lately? Did you and Jilo get everything worked out with the magistrates?
~U2Alabama

Oh yes, finally, but no thanks to Jilo. He fell asleep while the head magistrate was talking. Magistrates don't like that. They accept it as a sign of disrespect. I don't blame them for feeling this way. Once, Henneh fell asleep while I was reading the scriptures at church. It upset me, so I wouldn't play Monopoly with her for a week.
Milk of kindness to all,
Halpick Neftin

 

[melon]

Well, I'm sure most of you here expect exactly what kind of answer I'm going to give to this topic...but you're wrong.

Personally, I'm distressed over the constant sex that is beaten over everyone's heads in schools--i.e., sex education--and that goes for both heterosexuals and homosexuals, Kindergarteners and high schoolers. Perhaps this is the 13 years of Catholic schools coming out of me, but I used to think that schools were meant to teach you the necessities of life--reading, English (or substitute local language here), math, science, history, etc.--but I just find schools today to be propaganda grounds, where one interest group tries to persuade the younger generations to their personal belief systems. And, of course, this goes both ways. I find myself disgusted over some districts' constant desire to put religion into public education, as it is the same principle on propaganda, not to mention how some districts have had the audacity to eliminate evolution in science education--you may not believe it, but there are many theories in science you are taught that are both obsolete and current.

Overall, I don't think that those books are really appropriate for the Kindergarten level, unless the issue becomes imperative--i.e., some child has same-sex parents and the other kids are showing obvious intolerance or curiousity. However, other than that, the issue should be brought up later, just to allow the kids to grow up before having to know about the world. What I would give to be 5 and ignorant all over again...

But, the reality is that this issue should be brought up sooner or later. While many teachers may be ignorant about the subject, it's no secret that kids grow up thinking it's okay to crack constant homophobic jokes. You can always disagree with something, but someone needs to teach people to either tolerate or to keep their prejudices to themselves. The rest of the world has to do that.

Oh and Halpick...nice to see you back, but watch yourself. There's something not natural about a 16th century village stereotype talking on an internet U2 forum either, but you don't see me complaining.

Melon

------------------
?Confused by thoughts, we experience duality in life. Unencumbered by ideas, the enlightened see the one reality.? - Hui-neng (638-713)

 

[80sU2isBest]

Originally posted by melon:
Oh and Halpick...nice to see you back, but watch yourself. There's something not natural about a 16th century village stereotype talking on an internet U2 forum either, but you don't see me complaining.
Melon

Yes, Halpick. Nice to see you back.
Melon, I have a question for you. Why did you tell Halpick to "watch himself"? Was that a threat? Is he not allowed to express his views? This post asked for opinions, and he gave it.
And by the way, he's right about a child having 2 dads not being "natural". God provided a way whereby a man and a woman have babies. That is what is natural. 2 men or 2 women can't have babies. That is unnatural. It is simply not naturl for a child to have 2 men as parents.

 

[bonoman]

Originally posted by melon:

Personally, I'm distressed over the constant sex that is beaten over everyone's heads in schools--i.e., sex education--and that goes for both heterosexuals and homosexuals, Kindergarteners and high schoolers. Perhaps this is the 13 years of Catholic schools coming out of me, but I used to think that schools were meant to teach you the necessities of life--reading, English (or substitute local language here), math, science, history, etc

What!!!
Are you crazy?
Sex education shouldnt be taught? I dont care where you live there are parents that dont talk to their kids about sex. Plain and simple. Schools are the next best thing. If you have the right teacher teaching that class it can become a very informative class. Sez education is just as important as any other class. Because if you dont know about sex and the methods of birth control and such then you might become pregnant or have a partner that is pregnant and all those other subjects will have no baring on your life!!!

------------------
Running to Stand Still-"you gotta cry without weeping, talk without speaking, scream without raising your voice."

"we're not burning out we're burning up...we're the loudest folk band in the world!"-Bono

 

[Henry Rollins]

I actually think sex education is a necessity in high school, but it shouldn't be just sex education, it should be that with economics too. It should basically be a class that is going to scare the shit out of kids when they begin having sex when they are still young. It will show the consequences of having a baby when still a teenager and how chances are they are going to live in poverty. It will be a basic beating down of all the worst things that come with actions, telling the kids their life is going to be hard and tough when doing such things and that are likely not to have such a great job and they prolly will not be able to have as much free time as they would prefer and they aren't going to live in the nicest house. It will be a basic beating down of those facts and then it will move on to all the diseases that they can get from having sex and how kids aren't invincible and that 65 million americans do have STD's and it isn't something just made up.

~rougerum

 

[Angela Harlem]

I just want to observe 2 things. It didnt sound as though melon is against sex education in its proper age group. He did make a general statement, but it seemed more directed at the way it is currently taught. I wont go on further as each country has different sex education curriculum. But sex is an issue for teenagers onward, not 5-6 year olds who are only interested in tonka trucks and painting.
Also, I dont think anyone was arguing that science and nature aren't able to allow same sex folks to produce children. It is however possible for same sex couples to be parents. How good they will be remains with the individual couples discretion and abilities as parents in general.

All in all though, it is probably better to instill in children that the family unit can consist of any number of people and genders. Children wont realise they are different until some cruel peer points out that they are different. And when that happens, the parents must be there to handle that obstacle. Same sex parents will be aware that the issue will eventually arise, and therefore plan for that. I believe it is a primamry role for the parents, and a supporting one for teachers.

 

[melon]

Originally posted by 80sU2isBest:
Yes, Halpick. Nice to see you back.
Melon, I have a question for you. Why did you tell Halpick to "watch himself"? Was that a threat? Is he not allowed to express his views? This post asked for opinions, and he gave it.

Let me put this simply. I think he's a troll of a regular on this forum. I don't take kindly to trolls.

And by the way, he's right about a child having 2 dads not being "natural". God provided a way whereby a man and a woman have babies. That is what is natural. 2 men or 2 women can't have babies. That is unnatural. It is simply not naturl for a child to have 2 men as parents.

I do love it when people define what is 'natural' to me. While God did predefine a structure for the animal kingdom--i.e., that does include humans--he, in His infinite wisdom, gave us the power to transcend banal nature. In fact, that seems to be the overall theme of Christianity for the last two millennia; but, then when convenient, we are then told to be limited to our anatomy.

So you want to play the "nature game"? Then we should be bisexual. Anthropology has determined that, in studying cultures that have no cultural taboos on sexuality (unlike Western Christian culture that has thousands of taboos), man is bisexual by nature. It is their belief that exclusive sexuality on both ends is a cultural construct. It is disappointing that man limits what God designed.

Melon

------------------
?Confused by thoughts, we experience duality in life. Unencumbered by ideas, the enlightened see the one reality.? - Hui-neng (638-713)

 

[melon]

My problem with sex education is that it's hard not to teach it without some overwhelming prejudice or bias. It needs to be taught objectively.

My problem is kind of what rougerum stated as a positive of sex education: "It should basically be a class that is going to scare the shit out of kids..." I don't think that such tactics are either mentally healthy or effective. It is like D.A.R.E., a program that has many good intentions to prevent kids from doing drugs, but it just ends up as a way to expose kids to their existence. In fact, it was programs like that that I learned that drugs existed! However, in a usual teenage rebellion, one often gets cynical of what they are taught and will do the exact opposite.

I think that sex education should be approached in a wholly objective manner, allowing kids to understand what is all involved. Perhaps it should no longer be 'sex education,' but, rather, 'Health' class. Scare tactics will only drive them to what they are told not to do; but face it. Most of you remember the way you found out about sex, and I really doubt it was from school. I think we have to remember that kids are just younger versions of ourselves, and they'll figure it all out one way or another.

Melon

------------------
?Confused by thoughts, we experience duality in life. Unencumbered by ideas, the enlightened see the one reality.? - Hui-neng (638-713)

 

[80sU2isBest]

Originally posted by melon:
I do love it when people define what is 'natural' to me. While God did predefine a structure for the animal kingdom--i.e., that does include humans--he, in His infinite wisdom, gave us the power to transcend banal nature. In fact, that seems to be the overall theme of Christianity for the last two millennia; but, then when convenient, we are then told to be limited to our anatomy. So you want to play the "nature game"? Then we should be bisexual. Anthropology has determined that, in studying cultures that have no cultural taboos on sexuality (unlike Western Christian culture that has thousands of taboos), man is bisexual by nature. It is their belief that exclusive sexuality on both ends is a cultural construct. It is disappointing that man limits what God designed.
Melon

Melon, your arrogance never ceases to amaze me. In your great wisdom, you assume that someone is what you call a "troll", so it's okay to threaten that person.
In response to your points, I'll start with the "bi-sexual" bit first. Stop wandering. I was not discussing "taboos" or anything other than pure anatomy. Man is designed anatomically for woman, and vice versa. The female reproductive system can only produce babies with the help of a male, not a female. That alone should tell you that it is natural for a man and a woman to be parents but not 2 women or 2 men.
Also, your statement about Christianity and "nature" does not fit into this conversation AT ALL. People are given a new nature when they become Christians, but that doesn't have anything to do with anatomy. That has to do with the spirit. Not once are Christians told to "fight their nature" in the sense you are talking about. Christians are told to resist temptation for heterosexual sex until they are married, not forever. You remember that God created sex, right?

 

[BLOCK]

Originally posted by Angela Harlem:
I just want to observe 2 things. It didnt sound as though melon is against sex education in its proper age group. He did make a general statement, but it seemed more directed at the way it is currently taught. I wont go on further as each country has different sex education curriculum. But sex is an issue for teenagers onward, not 5-6 year olds who are only interested in tonka trucks and painting.
Also, I dont think anyone was arguing that science and nature aren't able to allow same sex folks to produce children. It is however possible for same sex couples to be parents. How good they will be remains with the individual couples discretion and abilities as parents in general.

All in all though, it is probably better to instill in children that the family unit can consist of any number of people and genders. Children wont realise they are different until some cruel peer points out that they are different. And when that happens, the parents must be there to handle that obstacle. Same sex parents will be aware that the issue will eventually arise, and therefore plan for that. I believe it is a primamry role for the parents, and a supporting one for teachers.

I think the point of them "teaching" or reading about it in class is to eliminate the idea that they are different, or that they should be made fun of. I think it's not only pointed at the students with same sex parents, but it is for the students who would be otherwise making fun of those other children. To creat some sort normal aspect to same sex relationships to eliminate the thinking that the other students in the class are "freaks" for having same sex parents.

Also in reply to what seems to be the general thought, they aren't teaching the kids about sex. They are simply reading them CHILDRENS BOOKS with a story where a child has to same sex parents, it ISN'T the main focus of the book.

 

[BLOCK]

The ignorance in this forum sometimes makes me cry, I didn't start a discussion on the "naturalness" or "correctness" of same sex relationships. Or if this "god" you speak of made us to choose or not to choose, same sex "relations", as they are, happen in the "wild" just as they happen in human life. Many animals have sex with anouther animal of hte same sex, it happens.

also, AGAIN, they arn't teaching the children about how the sex works, or any think like that. They are just reading them stories in which a child has same sex parents, it is NOT(from my understanding) the main focus of the book.

 

[Henry Rollins]

What i was talking about would be nothing like dare and would not be aimed at kids that young, it would be in high school and at kids that already know enough about sex and are familiar with it. High School kids know about it, you need to get on their level and take cold hard true facts with them about it. I took dare and that was pussy footing around everything drugs were about. I do think this needs to be kind of brainwashing, even though a word like that may sound bad it is necessary. Because if people get pregnant and end up having a hard time in life I gurantee you that would be much more mentally unhealthy to them than any class ever dreamed of.

~rougerum

 

[BLOCK]

Originally posted by 80sU2isBest:
Gee whiz! Did you ask "what do you think" or did you not? Answer: you asked "what do you think"! And some people told you that they dopn't agree with you. And now you say "well, I didn't ask if you think two male or two female parents is natural." But, my opinion on whether this kind of class should be tought is based on the morality of it all. I think that it is not right for a child to be raised by 2 men as opposed to a man and a woman, and that is why I do not think this kind of teaching should be done. How can you ask me "what do you think", but then say "you can't base your opinion on ceratin criteria"?

[/B]

sorry about that, i just got carried away with myself. I just didn't want this to turn into anouther discussion about "the horror of homosexuality" thats all.

 

[80sU2isBest]

Originally posted by BLOCK:

sorry about that, i just got carried away with myself. I just didn't want this to turn into anouther discussion about "the horror of homosexuality" thats all.

That's alright. Everyone knows I think homosexuality is wrong. But I also don't usually bring it up, either. But in the case, it is not the morality of homsexuality that is at issue here, it is the morality of 2 male parents or 2 female parents that is an issue for me. And the reason I brought up all the anatomy stuff was because I was upset with Melon for jumping on Halpick, who seems like a nice enough guy.

 

[BLOCK]

no worries. (i don't care much for melon either)

So, from what i can see there is a general thinking that this new action being taken by teachers is a bad thing. But "they" have already voted for it, so i guess only time will tell if it really does work out.

and just to recap they wanted it to make children with same sex parents feel comfortable at school and give the other children reference so that they don't fear/hate what they don't understand.

 

[80sU2isBest]

Originally posted by BLOCK:
The ignorance in this forum sometimes makes me cry, I didn't start a discussion on the "naturalness" or "correctness" of same sex relationships. Or if this "god" you speak of made us to choose or not to choose, same sex "relations", as they are, happen in the "wild" just as they happen in human life. Many animals have sex with anouther animal of hte same sex, it happens.

also, AGAIN, they arn't teaching the children about how the sex works, or any think like that. They are just reading them stories in which a child has same sex parents, it is NOT(from my understanding) the main focus of the book.

Gee whiz! Did you ask "what do you think" or did you not? Answer: you asked "what do you think"! And some people told you that they dopn't agree with you. And now you say "well, I didn't ask if you think two male or two female parents is natural." But, my opinion on whether this kind of class should be tought is based on the morality of it all. I think that it is not right for a child to be raised by 2 men as opposed to a man and a woman, and that is why I do not think this kind of teaching should be done. How can you ask me "what do you think", but then say "you can't base your opinion on ceratin criteria"?

 

[melon]

Originally posted by 80sU2isBest:
Melon, your arrogance never ceases to amaze me. In your great wisdom, you assume that someone is what you call a "troll", so it's okay to threaten that person.

And what, dare I say, does a 'threat' mean on the internet? It's hollow. It's going to go nowhere. Period.

The fact that I think he's a 'troll' has nothing to do with what he wrote in that passage, but a culmination of the fact that he's a horrible archetype of what people think of farmers, which I find to be incredibly insulting, as I come from a farmer's family. No, we're not a bunch of naive hicks who don't know what the world is outside of our small town.

In response to your points, I'll start with the "bi-sexual" bit first. Stop wandering. I was not discussing "taboos" or anything other than pure anatomy. Man is designed anatomically for woman, and vice versa. The female reproductive system can only produce babies with the help of a male, not a female. That alone should tell you that it is natural for a man and a woman to be parents but not 2 women or 2 men.

Well, I do appreciate your opinion, but I respectfully disagree; but, for argument's sake, let's say it is unnatural. It's no different than an infertile heterosexual couple raising adopted children. This is surely not as nature intended, but this is seen as more than acceptable in society.

Also, your statement about Christianity and "nature" does not fit into this conversation AT ALL. People are given a new nature when they become Christians, but that doesn't have anything to do with anatomy. That has to do with the spirit. Not once are Christians told to "fight their nature" in the sense you are talking about. Christians are told to resist temptation for heterosexual sex until they are married, not forever. You remember that God created sex, right?

I'm talking about historical Christianity mostly. St. Paul and later ideological successors believed it was up to man to transcend and go beyond our physical nature. Yet, when it came to human desires, people were told to suppress or stick to what is 'natural'--i.e., physical anatomical design. While modern Christianity doesn't go nearly as far as it's predecessors, the cultural subconscious is obviously influenced by them, including what many people claim is 'natural.'

But I see I'm 'arrogant' now. I do love it when people call me names.

Milk of kindness to all,
Melon

------------------
?Confused by thoughts, we experience duality in life. Unencumbered by ideas, the enlightened see the one reality.? - Hui-neng (638-713)

 

[80sU2isBest]

Originally posted by melon:
But I see I'm 'arrogant' now. I do love it when people call me names.

You're not "arrogant now", Melon, you've been called that many times. Sometimes you just fit that label, man. And it's not as if you're somehow "above" calling people names. I've seen even the Great and Mighty Melon stoop to that level. Remember Quick Vick? Also, do you remember the things you've called us fundamental Christians?

 

[melon]

I do not claim to be perfect. Nor do I claim to be 'great and mighty.' Any such claims are not endorsed by the entity behind the persona, 'melon.'

QuickVick is a separate story. Names were called only after his persistent attempts to agitate me. Remember point #1: I do not claim to be perfect.

And what I've called fundamentalist Christians is only a fraction of the hurtful stuff they've labelled to me directly and indirectly. I do apologize to you, 80s, but I have no sympathy for the devil.

Melon

------------------
?Confused by thoughts, we experience duality in life. Unencumbered by ideas, the enlightened see the one reality.? - Hui-neng (638-713)

 

[80sU2isBest]

Originally posted by melon:
I do apologize to you, 80s.

Then I apologize to you, Melon.